|
Sartrian -> RE: EXPELLED (4/21/2008 11:49:50 PM)
|
You all will have to pardon me-- I find having a small dinner and watching some television to be far more engrossing than prodding at the happily deluded theists in their cages. I'll try not to let it happen again.
quote:
As does your ability to make things up as you go along.
How does the old saying go? Sticks and stones will break my bones, but your attempts to rewrite reality are laughable and pathetic?
quote:
So it’s logical to conflate evolution and atheism?
You were the one who implied that all evolutionary biologists are atheists. I simply implied that working in science quickly rids one of their subjective, irrational beliefs.
quote:
And what genetic tests were done to determine what genetic changes occurred?
"To examine what genetic and molecular mechanisms underlie these dramatic changes, the researchers studied the activities of thousands of genes in the brain of selected and non-selected silver foxes and compared the activity of these genes with that of genes in the brains of wild foxes."
--Jazin et al.: "Selection for tameness has changed brain gene expression in silver foxes." Publishing in Current Biology, Vol. 15, R915-R916, November 22, 2005, DOI 10.1016/j.cub.2005.11.009
Well, how about that, Bubba?
quote:
Really? The ‘dog’ (foxes actually) experiment showed how “novel body plans, organs, and complex, interdependent structures.” developed? Where was that in the paper?
"Physically, the foxes differ markedly from their wild relatives. Some of the differences have obvious links to the changes in their social behavior. In dogs, for example, it is well known that the first weeks of life are crucial for forming primary social bonds with human beings. The "window" of bonding opens when a puppy becomes able to sense and explore its surroundings, and it closes when the pup starts to fear unknown stimuli.
According to our studies, nondomesticated fox pups start responding to auditory stimuli on day 16 after birth, and their eyes are completely open by day 18 or 19. On average, our domesticated fox pups respond to sounds two days earlier and open their eyes a day earlier than their nondomesticated cousins. Nondomesticated foxes first show the fear response at 6 weeks of age; domesticated ones show it after 9 weeks or even later. (Dogs show it at 8 to 12 weeks, depending on the breed.) As a result, domesticated pups have more time to become incorporated into a human social environment.
Moreover, we have found that the delayed development of the fear response is linked to changes in plasma levels of corticosteroids, hormones concerned with an animal's adaptation to stress. In foxes, the level of corticosteroids rises sharply between the ages of 2 to 4 months and reach adult levels by the age of 8 months. One of our studies found that the more advanced an animal's selection for domesticated behavior was, the later it showed the fear response and the later came the surge in its plasma corticosteroids. Thus, selection for domestication gives rises to changes in the timing of the postnatal development of certain physiological and hormonal mechanisms underlying the formation of social behavior.
Other physical changes mirror those in dogs and other domesticated animals. In our foxes, novel traits began to appear in the eighth to tenth selected generations. The first ones we noted were changes in the foxes' coat color, chiefly a loss of pigment in certain areas of the body, leading in some cases to a star-shaped pattern on the face similar to that seen in some breeds of dog. Next came traits such as floppy ears and rolled tails similar to those in some breeds of dog. After 15 to 20 generations we noted the appearance of foxes with shorter tails and legs and with underbites or overbites. The novel traits are still fairly rare. Most of them show up in no more than a few animals per 100 to a few per 10,000. Some have been seen in commercial populations, though at levels at least a magnitude lower than we recorded in our domesticated foxes."
--Published by American Scientist, Vol. 87 No. 2 (March-April 1999)
Article by Lyudmila N. Trut, Ph.D.
quote:
I am not even sure this statement makes sense.
It means that calling Evolution a failed theory because of its complex implications is idiotic.
quote:
Hey, I was just confirming that you believe the science of evolution and the metaphysical belief in atheism are neccesarily intertwined.
Nope. Evolution is a function of nature, and thus, without any sort of subjective meaning. Try again.
quote:
Well, I have no problem with progress, though it’s good to understand the trade-offs.
What? Gender equality, sexual equality, an end to racism, secular government that doesn't oppress people who don't belong to the right clique? You'll have to tell me.
I don't think you have any idea what the topic is.
quote:
Nonetheless, if you know a little bit about the cell, you are familiar with the molecular mechanisms contained therein – also called nano-machinery.
Who, exactly calls the molecular processes inside of cells "nano-machinery?" The general use of the term nano-machinery refers to a field of robotics on the sub-microscopic level.
quote:
Now I’m remembering why we don’t want atheists in charge…guess Ben Stein was right after all.
Oh, come now. Can't a godless heathen make a joke now and then? We have such wonderful senses of humor-- you should hear the "Intelligent Design" jokes. You'd die laughing.
quote:
Or maybe I will call you a luddite – oh, wait, that was your ad hom.
You could call me a Luddite. Oh, wait. Except that I'm for the progress of technology and ideas that will benefit all humanity, rather than my own little insular cult. Oops! Sorry!
|
|
|
|